80
Ways to Expose Services Publicly (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
86 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I want to expose my services publicly on my own domain name, how would you guys do that?

I have seen people using Cloudflare, but I don't want to use Cloudflare out of principle. I have also seen stuff on caddy and frp that I've done some rough researching.

What do you guys do?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

but what I tend to see is one or two people here saying that Jellyfin devs don’t recommend exposing it publicly

I think what the devs are saying is 'don't expose Jellyfin to the public in an unsafe manner'. I don't run Jellyfin, but can confirm what you've read here. In that vein, don't expose anything to the public in an unsafe manner.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    There is no safe manner of exposing jellyfin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Again, I do not run Jellyfin, but what you're saying seems contradictory to what the devs are implying: here and here. Since I lack the hands on experience, I will leave the issue with the experts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    That first page says exposing it to the Internet is "not recommended". Putting a reverse proxy in front of it does not meaningfully change the security posture. A malicious request to http://jellyfin.homelab.com/exploitable-page will be sent to jellyfin in effectively the same way, whether through a reverse proxy or not. You would need a WAF set up specifically to look for relevant exploit attempts.

    https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/5415

    Those are some outstanding known vulnerabilities, most of them unfixed. They are not particularly severe, but it shows that thorough security is not a priority for the jellyfin devs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    It says exposing a port directly to the internet is not recommended; do you know of any project that would recommend directly exposing a port? What is meaningfully different here?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Sure, any project designed to be exposed to the Internet. Web servers would be the most obvious.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Probably the number one recommendation I see in self hosting communities is to not open ports directly (other than for a reverse proxy). It seems like a common recommendation no matter the service. To be clear: I am a beginner. I know very little about this, but I've spent months learning. I can't say you're wrong, but I don't think you've made a convincing argument for me to actually understand why Jellyfin is unsafe to expose to the internet compared to any other service.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    You are welcome to expose it at your own risk. Assess you own tolerance for compromise (personal data compromise, becoming part of a botnet, becoming a host for spam or CSAM) and proceed accordingly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Yes, that's exactly what I've done. You still haven't shown me why it's unsafe. If you can't, that's fine. At some threshold or another, nothing is secure. The one thing I know for sure is that that first page, that says it doesn't recommend exposing a port, does not say what you said it does.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •